Who wants a scrap 'secretly put his extension monies on a punt' trading position update?
Tough... here it is anyway
I'm no longer down £5k, not even £4k - no, I'm now a mere £1.6k in the red at cob today.
A deficit reduction rate that Ed Balls can only dream of....
I almost had a similiar tail of woe last night.
Backed Man City for the title at 7-5 for 200, laid off at evens on Betfair. All hunkydory till Spreadex voided the bloody bet !
Managed to rescue it by backing at Evens with Paddy Power - still a bit narked, kept my eye on the bet though as I was wondering if they would palp it...
Just seen the draw on the Death Match - Russia =Nick Palmer and Turkey = Andy Cooke. The Gods truly have a sense of humour. That stab, when it comes, is likely to be awesome. I just wish there were a way of legitimately betting on Diplomacy.
For those interested the full line-up is:
Russia - Nick Palmer Turkey - Andy "the Stiletto" Cooke Italy - Doctor "I want to be reasonable" FoxInSox England - Freggles Germany - Corporal France - Pulpstar Austria - Uncle "Why do I always get bloody Austria" Monty
As a reminder, there is no alliance win in this game so even if Russia and Turkey team up for the old-fashioned juggernaut (seldom seen nowadays but still potentially potent) one must stab the other before the end.
Keep an eye on Italy is my advice for this one.
Corporal? Do you seek to subtly demote me? Or hint at my napoleonic prowess?
How does one spectate, this sounds like it could be interesting.
You kind of can't - well the real game is in the messages and those are private. I'll PM you.
Just read what Farage said about Ukraine. Imbecilic madness. He might have lost my vote over that.
Nope, he was absolutely right on the Ukraine. The EU poked and poked and poked and then stood there with surprised looks on their faces when Russia poked back.
Be fair. The EU was told F** off because the U.S. weren't happy with their meddling.
Just read what Farage said about Ukraine. Imbecilic madness. He might have lost my vote over that.
Nope, he was absolutely right on the Ukraine. The EU poked and poked and poked and then stood there with surprised looks on their faces when Russia poked back.
That's an argument that only makes sense as an analogy and completely breaks down when you talk about it in terms of the actual actions that took place. The EU attempted to negotiate a partnership agreement. Russia invaded a sovereign country. It's cut and dry.
Just read what Farage said about Ukraine. Imbecilic madness. He might have lost my vote over that.
Nope, he was absolutely right on the Ukraine. The EU poked and poked and poked and then stood there with surprised looks on their faces when Russia poked back.
Forget your opinion of Farage, my opinion of you has plummeted over the Ukraine issue.
That's nonsense, nothing the EU has done regarding Ukraine warrants the Russian response.
The Russian government had a treaty obligation to respect the territorial integrity of Ukraine, instead they invaded and annexed Crimea. The Russian government has blatantly ignored their obligations, lied, threatened violence, seized Ukrainian property, engaged in some laughably transparent propaganda, and even murdered people.
The Russian government is amply demonstrating that they will break treaties, can't be trusted by the EU, and are a potential threat to many eastern European nations. God knows why anyone in this country is siding with them.
Farage is a bloody idiot to give Russia any succour, and any inclination I had to vote UKIP in the European elections is now gone.
Sun hinting one debate participant put 12% on their personal ratings after tonight....
Which one ?
Ferrari.
This debate is to politics what the Scotland Italy game is to the six nations.
Scotland came third and Italy fourth in 2013, ahead of the 2014 champions Ireland and multiple times winner France. Sometimes the smaller teams can have a larger impact than their composition and history would suggest.
"Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm not sure you're being a 100% serious with that"
I most certainly was. Mrs Jessop is not, as far as you have disclosed, a political anorak and is, again as far as you have disclosed, a free thinker. Therefore, like Cap'n Docs mum and TSE's dad, she is worth listening too when it comes to politics - more than some people on this site that's for sure.
" I promise I'll not mention HS2. Much."
Ah, well stuff it then. I am due to be in your neck of the woods in early May and was going to suggest meeting up for a glass or two but if you won't want to talk engineering projects I guess I'll be able to find a HR manager to drink with or a newly painted wall to watch dry.
Oh, I think I may be able to find a few highly interesting and pertinent facts about engineering (NATM in civ eng projects being a particular amateur favourite of mine) that I could wax lyrical about. If we make it the Baron of Beef then I'll be able to talk about the history of Acorn and ARM in relation to that hostelry. As you can imagine, it's all fascinating stuff. But people always seem to want to stare at that newly-painted wall instead...
Just read what Farage said about Ukraine. Imbecilic madness. He might have lost my vote over that.
Nope, he was absolutely right on the Ukraine. The EU poked and poked and poked and then stood there with surprised looks on their faces when Russia poked back.
That's an argument that only makes sense as an analogy and completely breaks down when you talk about it in terms of the actual actions that took place. The EU attempted to negotiate a partnership agreement. Russia invaded a sovereign country. It's cut and dry.
Forget your opinion of Farage, my opinion of you has plummeted over the Ukraine issue.
You'll be glad to know the feeling is mutual. Denial of Ukrainian nationhood was a particular low point.
LOL. It is sad you can only make a point by misrepresenting someone else's opinion. The denial was not of Ukraine's nationhood but of its supposed long continuous history in its current form that you so desperately tried (and failed) to prove.
I know that you lose all faculty of coherent thought when the issue of the Ukraine comes up and for the life of me I can't understand why unless you have some personal connection to the place. But I am afraid that Farage was absolutely right to lay the blame at the door of the EU whose cack handed idiocy in this matter is only surpassed by their hypocrisy.
Just read what Farage said about Ukraine. Imbecilic madness. He might have lost my vote over that.
Nope, he was absolutely right on the Ukraine. The EU poked and poked and poked and then stood there with surprised looks on their faces when Russia poked back.
Be fair. The EU was told F** off because the U.S. weren't happy with their meddling.
LOL. It is sad you can only make a point by misrepresenting someone else's opinion. The denial was not of Ukraine's nationhood but of its supposed long continuous history in its current form that you so desperately tried (and failed) to prove.
I know that you lose all faculty of coherent thought when the issue of the Ukraine comes up and for the life of me I can't understand why unless you have some personal connection to the place. But I am afraid that Farage was absolutely right to lay the blame at the door of the EU whose cack handed idiocy in this matter is only surpassed by their hypocrisy.
Given the US was funding the Ukrainian opposition, rather than the EU, it seems a little harsh to lay the blame solely at Brussels' door.
I think Nick achieved what he set out to achieve: a great big shed load of free publicity about the Lib Dems being the party of IN, that will appeal to 3 to 4 times as many people as the current Lib Dem poll rating. Job done.
Just read what Farage said about Ukraine. Imbecilic madness. He might have lost my vote over that.
Nope, he was absolutely right on the Ukraine. The EU poked and poked and poked and then stood there with surprised looks on their faces when Russia poked back.
That's an argument that only makes sense as an analogy and completely breaks down when you talk about it in terms of the actual actions that took place. The EU attempted to negotiate a partnership agreement. Russia invaded a sovereign country. It's cut and dry.
Forget your opinion of Farage, my opinion of you has plummeted over the Ukraine issue.
You'll be glad to know the feeling is mutual. Denial of Ukrainian nationhood was a particular low point.
LOL. It is sad you can only make a point by misrepresenting someone else's opinion. The denial was not of Ukraine's nationhood but of its supposed long continuous history in its current form that you so desperately tried (and failed) to prove.
I know that you lose all faculty of coherent thought when the issue of the Ukraine comes up and for the life of me I can't understand why unless you have some personal connection to the place. But I am afraid that Farage was absolutely right to lay the blame at the door of the EU whose cack handed idiocy in this matter is only surpassed by their hypocrisy.
The EU's fault? Interesting. It seems closer to me standing on someone's toe, being punched in the face in response, and it's my fault for starting it even if the punch was disproportionate, and they claimed I threw a punch first.
But I am too tired to argue that tonight, and so wish all a good night. Hope to catch a full replay of the debate at some point to catch the bits I missed.
Just read what Farage said about Ukraine. Imbecilic madness. He might have lost my vote over that.
Nope, he was absolutely right on the Ukraine. The EU poked and poked and poked and then stood there with surprised looks on their faces when Russia poked back.
Be fair. The EU was told F** off because the U.S. weren't happy with their meddling.
NeoCon style meddling being far preferable to that of course since that never backfires.
Ooo Now you've done it. Socrates will never forgive you for mentioning that. :-)
What exactly am I not supposed to forgive? The latest of Mick P0rk's bizarre rantings?
I don't have time to look in the thread in question, but if someone else finds it, it will show quite clearly that you claimed a lot more than Ukrainian history didn't go back to the Kievan Rus. The fact that you're having to resort to the "LOL"s of the worst debaters on here shows how weak your argument is. I have no idea why you repeat ridiculous lines from the Kremlin, let alone get so nasty in your attacks over this issue, but I can't help but wonder if your involvement in the oil and gas industry is relevant.
Just read what Farage said about Ukraine. Imbecilic madness. He might have lost my vote over that.
Nope, he was absolutely right on the Ukraine. The EU poked and poked and poked and then stood there with surprised looks on their faces when Russia poked back.
Be fair. The EU was told F** off because the U.S. weren't happy with their meddling.
Just read what Farage said about Ukraine. Imbecilic madness. He might have lost my vote over that.
Nope, he was absolutely right on the Ukraine. The EU poked and poked and poked and then stood there with surprised looks on their faces when Russia poked back.
Be fair. The EU was told F** off because the U.S. weren't happy with their meddling.
NeoCon style meddling being far preferable to that of course since that never backfires.
Ooo Now you've done it. Socrates will never forgive you for mentioning that. :-)
Will the little flower flounce off the site in a fit of hilarious pomposity vowing never to return? Yet again. NeoCon chickenhawks are simply too dumb to ever take seriously. You would think after Iraq they might have learned to know when they are incredibly shaky ground. Or Syria come to that. It's not as if they will putting on their little tin hats and ever going to these places after all.
Just read what Farage said about Ukraine. Imbecilic madness. He might have lost my vote over that.
Nope, he was absolutely right on the Ukraine. The EU poked and poked and poked and then stood there with surprised looks on their faces when Russia poked back.
Be fair. The EU was told F** off because the U.S. weren't happy with their meddling.
NeoCon style meddling being far preferable to that of course since that never backfires.
Ooo Now you've done it. Socrates will never forgive you for mentioning that. :-)
Will the little flower flounce off the site in a fit of hilarious pomposity vowing never to return? Yet again. NeoCon chickenhawks are simply too dumb to ever take seriously. You would think after Iraq they might have learned to know when they are incredibly shaky ground. Or Syria come to that. It's not as if they will putting on their little tin hats and ever going to these places after all.
Just read what Farage said about Ukraine. Imbecilic madness. He might have lost my vote over that.
Nope, he was absolutely right on the Ukraine. The EU poked and poked and poked and then stood there with surprised looks on their faces when Russia poked back.
Be fair. The EU was told F** off because the U.S. weren't happy with their meddling.
NeoCon style meddling being far preferable to that of course since that never backfires.
Ooo Now you've done it. Socrates will never forgive you for mentioning that. :-)
Western diplomats and politicians are being smashed to bits diplomatically by the KGB spies. 2nd none too good vid for the west I've seen leaked.
The incompetence is as breathtaking as the hubris. Why would Putin care about the Ukraine after all? That Black Sea Fleet is of little consequence surely? It's not like Putin would use a gold plated excuse handed to him on a plate by these imbeciles to make a move as they floundered about with an opposition full of fruitcakes and out and out Neo-Nazis.
Just read what Farage said about Ukraine. Imbecilic madness. He might have lost my vote over that.
Nope, he was absolutely right on the Ukraine. The EU poked and poked and poked and then stood there with surprised looks on their faces when Russia poked back.
Be fair. The EU was told F** off because the U.S. weren't happy with their meddling.
NeoCon style meddling being far preferable to that of course since that never backfires.
Ooo Now you've done it. Socrates will never forgive you for mentioning that. :-)
Will the little flower flounce off the site in a fit of hilarious pomposity vowing never to return? Yet again. NeoCon chickenhawks are simply too dumb to ever take seriously. You would think after Iraq they might have learned to know when they are incredibly shaky ground. Or Syria come to that. It's not as if they will putting on their little tin hats and ever going to these places after all.
Sigh. Genuine question: how old are you?
Sigh. Genuine question. do you know what the words "pompous" or "oaf" mean? How about "bloviating". At least put some effort in as this is feeble trolling even for a lightweight like you.
Putin is just undoing Kruschevs bizarre Crimea to Ukraine decision. He has no interest in Ukraine outside of that other than as a cage rattling exercise. Crimea doesn't want to be part of Ukraine. Simples.
Just read what Farage said about Ukraine. Imbecilic madness. He might have lost my vote over that.
Nope, he was absolutely right on the Ukraine. The EU poked and poked and poked and then stood there with surprised looks on their faces when Russia poked back.
Be fair. The EU was told F** off because the U.S. weren't happy with their meddling.
NeoCon style meddling being far preferable to that of course since that never backfires.
Ooo Now you've done it. Socrates will never forgive you for mentioning that. :-)
Will the little flower flounce off the site in a fit of hilarious pomposity vowing never to return? Yet again. NeoCon chickenhawks are simply too dumb to ever take seriously. You would think after Iraq they might have learned to know when they are incredibly shaky ground. Or Syria come to that. It's not as if they will putting on their little tin hats and ever going to these places after all.
Sigh. Genuine question: how old are you?
Sigh. Genuine question. do you know what the words "pompous" or "oaf" mean? How about "bloviating". At least put some effort in as this is feeble trolling even for a lightweight like you.
So you're unwilling to say. Got it.
I'm happy to let others' judge this interaction and which of us comes across a pompous, bloviating oaf. Have a good evening.
Just read what Farage said about Ukraine. Imbecilic madness. He might have lost my vote over that.
Nope, he was absolutely right on the Ukraine. The EU poked and poked and poked and then stood there with surprised looks on their faces when Russia poked back.
Be fair. The EU was told F** off because the U.S. weren't happy with their meddling.
NeoCon style meddling being far preferable to that of course since that never backfires.
Ooo Now you've done it. Socrates will never forgive you for mentioning that. :-)
Will the little flower flounce off the site in a fit of hilarious pomposity vowing never to return? Yet again. NeoCon chickenhawks are simply too dumb to ever take seriously. You would think after Iraq they might have learned to know when they are incredibly shaky ground. Or Syria come to that. It's not as if they will putting on their little tin hats and ever going to these places after all.
Sigh. Genuine question: how old are you?
Sigh. Genuine question. do you know what the words "pompous" or "oaf" mean? How about "bloviating". At least put some effort in as this is feeble trolling even for a lightweight like you.
So you're unwilling to say. Got it.
Oh dear. You're imagining yourself to be the PB 'grand inquisitor' again, aren't you?
As you say, I'm happy to let others' judge this interaction and which of us comes across a pompous, bloviating oaf.
And you judge that on the basis of a referendum that only had the options of independence or annexation, with Russian tanks on the street and where pro-Kiev voices were getting beaten up on the streets? The opinion polls prior to the recent events were a lot less clear.
And you judge that on the basis of a referendum that only had the options of independence or annexation, with Russian tanks on the street and where pro-Kiev voices were getting beaten up on the streets? The opinion polls prior to the recent events were a lot less clear.
That is what I'm judging it on, you're right. But there's limited evidence of pro Ukraine sentiment in Crimea, today or back to 1954. Ukraine dropped the ball. They are now paying
And you judge that on the basis of a referendum that only had the options of independence or annexation, with Russian tanks on the street and where pro-Kiev voices were getting beaten up on the streets? The opinion polls prior to the recent events were a lot less clear.
That is what I'm judging it on, you're right. But there's limited evidence of pro Ukraine sentiment in Crimea, today or back to 1954. Ukraine dropped the ball. They are now paying
"Limited evidence of sentiment" to stay with a country is not grounds for a foreign invasion and annexation of territory.
It's amazing the BBC keeps showing Nick Clegg's joke about 29 million people not even living in Romania and Bulgaria, but leaving out Nigel Farage's killer response being that's because 2 million have already left...
Guardian double standards on voting under Russian and US-UK occupation
The Guardian on latest events in Crimea:
'The referendum that took place in Crimea is both irrelevant and deeply significant. Irrelevant because it has no standing in the law of the country to which it applies, and because it took place while the autonomous region was under military occupation.'
By contrast, a January 7, 2005 Guardian leader on Iraq under US-UK occupation - indeed a couple of months after Fallujah had been virtually destroyed - referred to 'the country's first free election in decades'. ('Vote against violence,' Leader, The Guardian, January 7, 2005)
A September, 2004 Guardian leader had warned: 'if the security situation does not improve, there is doubt... over the feasibility of holding the country's first democratic election in January as planned'. (Leader, 'Kofi Annan on Iraq: The war was illegal,' The Guardian, September 17, 2004)
The Guardian's Ewen MacAskill reported that Blair had visited Baghdad as Iraq 'prepares for the country's first democratic election next month'. (Ewen MacAskill, 'Blair 'feels the danger' on visit to Baghdad,' December 22, 2004)
And you judge that on the basis of a referendum that only had the options of independence or annexation, with Russian tanks on the street and where pro-Kiev voices were getting beaten up on the streets? The opinion polls prior to the recent events were a lot less clear.
That is what I'm judging it on, you're right. But there's limited evidence of pro Ukraine sentiment in Crimea, today or back to 1954. Ukraine dropped the ball. They are now paying
"Limited evidence of sentiment" to stay with a country is not grounds for a foreign invasion and annexation of territory.
So risk WW3, send in the troops and force a further referendum, the result will be the same. We will do nothing about it the way we did nothing about Syria. Nothing about Mugabe. Nothing about etc etc. We need Ukraine as an ally like we need Berlusconi as PM of Italy. The moral high ground disappeared the moment Bush and Blair cooked up an invasion of Iraq, now we reap what we sowed. That aside, if we marched into Sevastapol as liberators we would be despised. Crimea is back with Russia and we will take it like good little war criminals.
So risk WW3, send in the troops and force a further referendum, the result will be the same.
No, we close the Bosphorus to Russian ships and impose economic sanctions on Russia's gas sector until the Russian forces leave the province and allow the Ukrainians to restore order. We can potentially give them some face saving by allowing Crimea more autonomy, and a long term route for independence, providing due process is followed, including a fair division of liabilities.
We need Ukraine as an ally like we need Berlusconi as PM of Italy.
This isn't about Ukraine being an ally. This is whether we allow the precedent of regional powers invading their neighbours to annex territory without facing recriminations. That is a recipe for huge international instability.
The moral high ground disappeared the moment Bush and Blair cooked up an invasion of Iraq, now we reap what we sowed.
The Iraq War was a reckless and foolish mistake on overblown evidence. But Saddam Hussein was in clear breach of the non-proliferation regime to which Iraq was a signatory, and had been recognised as such by the UN. What has the Ukrainian government done to justify an invasion, other than choosing international alliances not to Russia's liking?
Also, the current US President opposed the Iraq War. Are we forbidden from acting ethically or enforcing international law ever again because of one episode? A bizarre thought process.
So risk WW3, send in the troops and force a further referendum, the result will be the same.
No, we close the Bosphorus to Russian ships and impose economic sanctions on Russia's gas sector until the Russian forces leave the province and allow the Ukrainians to restore order. We can potentially give them some face saving by allowing Crimea more autonomy, and a long term route for independence, providing due process is followed, including a fair division of liabilities.
We need Ukraine as an ally like we need Berlusconi as PM of Italy.
This isn't about Ukraine being an ally. This is whether we allow the precedent of regional powers invading their neighbours to annex territory without facing recriminations. That is a recipe for huge international instability.
The moral high ground disappeared the moment Bush and Blair cooked up an invasion of Iraq, now we reap what we sowed.
The Iraq War was a reckless and foolish mistake on overblown evidence. But Saddam Hussein was in clear breach of the non-proliferation regime to which Iraq was a signatory, and had been recognised as such by the UN. What has the Ukrainian government done to justify an invasion, other than choosing international alliances not to Russia's liking?
Also, the current US President opposed the Iraq War. Are we forbidden from acting ethically or enforcing international law ever again because of one episode? A bizarre thought process.
I didn't think that you were a fool, Socrates, but closing the Bosphorus to Russian ships will be an act of war, that's if Turkey would even allow it. We will soon be remembering the start of WW1 and you want to start WW3. Bloody crazy.
This isn't about Ukraine being an ally. This is whether we allow the precedent of regional powers invading their neighbours to annex territory without facing recriminations. That is a recipe for huge international instability.
you could argue that recognizing any old protest movement as a government in place of an existing, (albeit corrupt) reasonably democratically elected one is also not a recipe for stability.
It's amazing the BBC keeps showing Nick Clegg's joke about 29 million people not even living in Romania and Bulgaria, but leaving out Nigel Farage's killer response being that's because 2 million have already left...
Wasn't Farage's reply line to that something like "I'm not saying 29 million I'm saying something hundredmillion"?
The incompetence is as breathtaking as the hubris. Why would Putin care about the Ukraine after all? That Black Sea Fleet is of little consequence surely?
Assuming it not to be a rhetorical question, the reasons why Putin cares about the Ukraine are as follows:
1) Gas[1] Ukraine has - had - offshore gas reserves in the Black Sea and had ambitions to become a gas exporter. The Crimean annexation removes 40% of Ukraine's coastline and the new Crimean government has nationalised the offshore reserves and the pipelines. By annexing Crimea and any other bits he likes, Putin can extend Russia's hegemony over gas supplies to Europe
2) Buffer Zone If you combine the EU, the EEA, and Nato, then Russia is encircled to its west. Interestingly, Russia is creating parallel structures: for the EU read the Eurasian Union, for the EEA read the Eurasian Common Economic Space thingummy, for NATO read CSTO. The only European/Eurasian countries not committed either to EU/EEA/NATO or to EAU/EurAsEc/CSTO are Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova, and - interestingly - Serbia (let's discount FYROM, Bosnia, etc).
So Putin has annexed bits of Ukraine (Crimea), Georgia (Abkhazia, South Ossetia), and presumably will annex bits of Moldova next (Transnistria). In so doing, he prevents those countries joining NATO and extends Russia's influence over Eastern Europe.
Anybody who remembers the Cheney Iraq scene in W.[2] will recognise the approach, but in reverse: for oil read gas, for the US read Russia, for US bases read annexed regions. And because so many commentators are invested in their dislike of the EU they are willing to cheer on Russia as she increasingly controls the gas we need. We're being taken on by Russia and it's winning.
It's amazing the BBC keeps showing Nick Clegg's joke about 29 million people not even living in Romania and Bulgaria, but leaving out Nigel Farage's killer response being that's because 2 million have already left...
Wasn't Farage's reply line to that something like "I'm not saying 29 million I'm saying something hundredmillion"?
Yes Farage was factually correct in stating that 485 million people are entitled to come to live in the UK.
"Personally, I blame the Midlands' anonymity on the national media's obsession with the so-called "north/ south divide". There are few cliches journalists and broadcasters in Britain find less resistible than that which pictures the country in terms of a sharp and simple opposition between north and south, with the north cast as the great English "other", the rebellious, working-class outrider to the normative, establishmentarian south."
"While it is true that late-period Thatcher, furious that she had been removed by a plot, was capable of lashing out in a Ukip-style at Brussels and at anyone who disagreed with her, she was for most of her career not remotely interested in the politics of protest. She wanted power for her side. She wanted power so that she could get things done.
Much is made by her defenders – who increasingly can see no wrong in anything she did – of her attachment to principle. But at root she was a practical, pragmatic politician who understood the need to win general elections. Thatcher pre-1990 was always mindful of the electoral cycle and focussed on beating what she always saw (a legacy of her post-war experience) as the socialists in the Labour party.
I suspect the choice at the next election would look quite simple to Thatcher. A Tory leader is up against "Red Ed" from Hampstead. In that context, Ukip, with its attempt to break the party system and its howling at the moon, would have held very little appeal."
No, we close the Bosphorus to Russian ships and impose economic sanctions on Russia's gas sector until the Russian forces leave the province and allow the Ukrainians to restore order. We can potentially give them some face saving by allowing Crimea more autonomy, and a long term route for independence, providing due process is followed, including a fair division of liabilities.
Wouldn't we be as bad as the Russians, since such action would require us breaking our international obligations re the Montreux convention.
Guardian double standards on voting under Russian and US-UK occupation
The Guardian on latest events in Crimea:
'The referendum that took place in Crimea is both irrelevant and deeply significant. Irrelevant because it has no standing in the law of the country to which it applies, and because it took place while the autonomous region was under military occupation.'
By contrast, a January 7, 2005 Guardian leader on Iraq under US-UK occupation - indeed a couple of months after Fallujah had been virtually destroyed - referred to 'the country's first free election in decades'. ('Vote against violence,' Leader, The Guardian, January 7, 2005)
A September, 2004 Guardian leader had warned: 'if the security situation does not improve, there is doubt... over the feasibility of holding the country's first democratic election in January as planned'. (Leader, 'Kofi Annan on Iraq: The war was illegal,' The Guardian, September 17, 2004)
The Guardian's Ewen MacAskill reported that Blair had visited Baghdad as Iraq 'prepares for the country's first democratic election next month'. (Ewen MacAskill, 'Blair 'feels the danger' on visit to Baghdad,' December 22, 2004)
Comments
This debate is to politics what the Scotland Italy game is to the six nations.
Backed Man City for the title at 7-5 for 200, laid off at evens on Betfair. All hunkydory till Spreadex voided the bloody bet !
Managed to rescue it by backing at Evens with Paddy Power - still a bit narked, kept my eye on the bet though as I was wondering if they would palp it...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbOwfeoDX2o
NeoCon style meddling being far preferable to that of course since that never backfires.
The Russian government had a treaty obligation to respect the territorial integrity of Ukraine, instead they invaded and annexed Crimea. The Russian government has blatantly ignored their obligations, lied, threatened violence, seized Ukrainian property, engaged in some laughably transparent propaganda, and even murdered people.
The Russian government is amply demonstrating that they will break treaties, can't be trusted by the EU, and are a potential threat to many eastern European nations. God knows why anyone in this country is siding with them.
Farage is a bloody idiot to give Russia any succour, and any inclination I had to vote UKIP in the European elections is now gone.
I know that you lose all faculty of coherent thought when the issue of the Ukraine comes up and for the life of me I can't understand why unless you have some personal connection to the place. But I am afraid that Farage was absolutely right to lay the blame at the door of the EU whose cack handed idiocy in this matter is only surpassed by their hypocrisy.
In the next 24 hours there’s going to be a lot of spin, a lot of attempts at expectation management, a lot of attempts to get behind the headlines. But Nick Clegg beat Nigel Farage and beat him comfortably.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100265165/tonight-we-saw-the-worst-of-nigel-farage-and-the-best-of-nick-clegg/
Dan Hodges as always with his finger on the pulse of the nation.
But I am too tired to argue that tonight, and so wish all a good night. Hope to catch a full replay of the debate at some point to catch the bits I missed.
I don't have time to look in the thread in question, but if someone else finds it, it will show quite clearly that you claimed a lot more than Ukrainian history didn't go back to the Kievan Rus. The fact that you're having to resort to the "LOL"s of the worst debaters on here shows how weak your argument is. I have no idea why you repeat ridiculous lines from the Kremlin, let alone get so nasty in your attacks over this issue, but I can't help but wonder if your involvement in the oil and gas industry is relevant.
Yet again. NeoCon chickenhawks are simply too dumb to ever take seriously. You would think after Iraq they might have learned to know when they are incredibly shaky ground. Or Syria come to that. It's not as if they will putting on their little tin hats and ever going to these places after all.
Not a single Ukrainian political party received a dollar from the US government. The same can not be said of funding from the Russian government.
:roll
I'm happy to let others' judge this interaction and which of us comes across a pompous, bloviating oaf. Have a good evening.
As you say, I'm happy to let others' judge this interaction and which of us comes across a pompous, bloviating oaf.
#Iraq: 5 army hummers destroyed; dozens killed and wounded in clashes between insurgents and army in al-Mashahada, north #Baghdad.
Greg Mitchell @GregMitch Mar 21
To mark start of Iraq war: The U.S. soldier who killed herself after refusing to take part in torture. http://bit.ly/XXHQ1Y
Hurrah for witless NeoCon chickenhawks.
The Guardian on latest events in Crimea:
'The referendum that took place in Crimea is both irrelevant and deeply significant. Irrelevant because it has no standing in the law of the country to which it applies, and because it took place while the autonomous region was under military occupation.'
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/16/crimea-referendum-putin-threat-cold-war
By contrast, a January 7, 2005 Guardian leader on Iraq under US-UK occupation - indeed a couple of months after Fallujah had been virtually destroyed - referred to 'the country's first free election in decades'. ('Vote against violence,' Leader, The Guardian, January 7, 2005)
A September, 2004 Guardian leader had warned: 'if the security situation does not improve, there is doubt... over the feasibility of holding the country's first democratic election in January as planned'. (Leader, 'Kofi Annan on Iraq: The war was illegal,' The Guardian, September 17, 2004)
The Guardian's Ewen MacAskill reported that Blair had visited Baghdad as Iraq 'prepares for the country's first democratic election next month'. (Ewen MacAskill, 'Blair 'feels the danger' on visit to Baghdad,' December 22, 2004)
More details here: http://medialens.org/index.php/alerts/alert-archive/2005/374-unity-in-deceit-the-british-media-and-iraqs-election.html
Hypocrites, as usual.
We need Ukraine as an ally like we need Berlusconi as PM of Italy.
The moral high ground disappeared the moment Bush and Blair cooked up an invasion of Iraq, now we reap what we sowed.
That aside, if we marched into Sevastapol as liberators we would be despised. Crimea is back with Russia and we will take it like good little war criminals.
Also, the current US President opposed the Iraq War. Are we forbidden from acting ethically or enforcing international law ever again because of one episode? A bizarre thought process.
We will soon be remembering the start of WW1 and you want to start WW3. Bloody crazy.
1) Gas[1]
Ukraine has - had - offshore gas reserves in the Black Sea and had ambitions to become a gas exporter. The Crimean annexation removes 40% of Ukraine's coastline and the new Crimean government has nationalised the offshore reserves and the pipelines. By annexing Crimea and any other bits he likes, Putin can extend Russia's hegemony over gas supplies to Europe
2) Buffer Zone
If you combine the EU, the EEA, and Nato, then Russia is encircled to its west. Interestingly, Russia is creating parallel structures: for the EU read the Eurasian Union, for the EEA read the Eurasian Common Economic Space thingummy, for NATO read CSTO. The only European/Eurasian countries not committed either to EU/EEA/NATO or to EAU/EurAsEc/CSTO are Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova, and - interestingly - Serbia (let's discount FYROM, Bosnia, etc).
So Putin has annexed bits of Ukraine (Crimea), Georgia (Abkhazia, South Ossetia), and presumably will annex bits of Moldova next (Transnistria). In so doing, he prevents those countries joining NATO and extends Russia's influence over Eastern Europe.
Anybody who remembers the Cheney Iraq scene in W.[2] will recognise the approach, but in reverse: for oil read gas, for the US read Russia, for US bases read annexed regions. And because so many commentators are invested in their dislike of the EU they are willing to cheer on Russia as she increasingly controls the gas we need. We're being taken on by Russia and it's winning.
[1] http://www.platts.com/news-feature/2014/naturalgas/ukraine-crisis-energy-implications/ukraine-black-sea-hopes
[2] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6p5UxHRwpA
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/mar/26/why-midlands-is-best-place-in-britain
Iain Martin in the Daily Telegraph - Margaret Thatcher would not have liked Ukip
"While it is true that late-period Thatcher, furious that she had been removed by a plot, was capable of lashing out in a Ukip-style at Brussels and at anyone who disagreed with her, she was for most of her career not remotely interested in the politics of protest. She wanted power for her side. She wanted power so that she could get things done.
Much is made by her defenders – who increasingly can see no wrong in anything she did – of her attachment to principle. But at root she was a practical, pragmatic politician who understood the need to win general elections. Thatcher pre-1990 was always mindful of the electoral cycle and focussed on beating what she always saw (a legacy of her post-war experience) as the socialists in the Labour party.
I suspect the choice at the next election would look quite simple to Thatcher. A Tory leader is up against "Red Ed" from Hampstead. In that context, Ukip, with its attempt to break the party system and its howling at the moon, would have held very little appeal."
Steerpike in the Spectator - The room spun
Also, Scotland is currently under military occupation, perhaps the Guardian will write a similar piece on the upcoming indyref ;-)